• Gay BlogAds


  • Gay News Watch


  • Chris Tweets



  • « One-way blogging over at HRC | Main | Voices from Brazil's Bermuda Triangle »

    June 27, 2007

    Screwing Rudy over with red "X's"

    Posted by: Chris

    Ngltf_on_prez_candidates More information today on where the presidential candidates stand on gay, trans and HIV issues, as the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force issued its "first comprehensive analysis" of the 2008 race.

    In past elections, the Task Force has put out fair, useful and thorough analysis without the tendency to skew things for one candidate or another, like we saw from the pro-Hillary questionnaire last month by HRC. But on a nuts-and-bolts level, the Task Force report released today is surprisingly weak. The information is inconsistent, not well-documented, and even sloppy in places. Not only did the report fail to deliver any bombshells (like HRC's), the Task Force serves up what we already know while managing to leave out a surprisingly large amount.

    HRC received well-deserved praise from this blog for forcing the Democratic candidates to move beyond general rhetoric about "equal rights" for gay couples. As a result, the Dems are now on record supporting repeal of half or all of the Defense of Marriage Act, and — even more importantly as a practical matter — full federal recognition of gay couples in civil unions, domestic partnerships and other committed relationships.

    The Task Force, on the other hand, glosses over all of that, offering up a check-mark or a red "X" for "supports civil unions/DP." Since the Task Force didn't give a separate line-item for DOMA, immigration rights or federal benefits for civil unions, we're left with a mishmash of info.

    The Task Force deserves its own big red "X" on the issue of fairness to the candidates. You get a taste that "the fix was in" from the press release accompanying the report, in which E.D. Matt Foreman essentially concludes: Democrats good, Republicans bad:

    The differences between the Democratic and Republican fields of candidates on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues are shockingly stark and profoundly depressing. Over time, the majority of Americans have moved to support basic fairness for LGBT Americans, including nondiscrimination and hate crimes laws, repeal of 'Don't Ask Don't Tell,' and protections for our families. Sadly, the Republican field has gone in the opposite direction, still clearly pandering to the venom of the so-called 'religious right.'

    Giuliani_2Looking at the Task Force scorecard (above), you'd think he was right, given all the green check-marks on the Democratic side and all those red "X's" on the Republican half. But when you dig a little deeper, you find one Republican candidate — who just so happens to be the leading contender — didn't get a fair shake.

    On the eight issues highlighted by the Task Force, Rudy Giuliani gets check-marks for two, question marks with asterisks for two, question marks for two, and red checks for two.  Here's how it breaks down:

    • The two green check-marks are for opposing a federal marriage amendment (as do John McCain and Ron Paul) and supporting civil unions. So far, so good.
    • The two question marks with asterisks are on employment discrimination and hate crime laws. Rudy is on record supporting the inclusion of gays in both, but he doesn't get a green check because he hasn't said if he would protect transgender people, too.
    • The two question marks are on gays in the military, where Giuliani supports lifting the ban but not during a time of war (or GOP primary, one ventures); as well as for gay adoption, although I can't imagine him opposing.
    • Rudy gets a red "X" for opposing same-sex marriage, just like every serious contender on the Democratic side, and for (of all things) not supporting HIV/AIDS funding. The only evidence for that red "X" is a 2001 article from the New York Blade, when I was the paper's executive editor, in which an AIDS activist criticizes Mayor Giuliani for cutting prevention funds for communities of color. Color me underwhelmed.

    So strip away the questionable characterizations, and what do you get? Giuliani really deserves a red "X" on marriage only, and deserves check-marks (though some with asterisks) on all the rest, including (I'm betting) on adoption.

    Does that make Giuliani as good on gay issues as the leading Dems, who all score similarly? Hardly. His support is tepid in some areas and, as the HRC questionnaire demonstrates, the Democrats have committed to specific areas of progress that are central to treating gays (and gay relationships) equally. What's more, Giuliani's record on (dis)respecting civil liberties should give great pause to many gay Republicans who've been waiting for a "little l" libertarian to capture the party's imagination.

    Nonetheless, we should call Foreman out for his doomsday rhetoric about the Republican Party. While it's certainly true that the "religious right" influence is exaggerated in the GOP primary, and the party has a very long way to go before it's competitive on gay rights, the glass isn't all empty. For the first time ever, the Republican frontrunner has a decent gay rights record; one by the way that compares favorably to that of Bill Clinton.

    Click here for a complete summary of gay news about the U.S. presidential race, compiled on Gay News Watch.

    |

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834527dd469e200e008ce2f0d8834

    Comments

    1. Brian Miller on Jun 27, 2007 7:33:10 PM:

      NGTLF is a Democratic Party front group. Is it a surprise they're going to be favorable to Democrats? No.

      Rudy Guiliani is a flip-flopping control freak who has gone anti-gay to get more power for himself. Is he qualified to be president? No.

    1. Keith Daly on Jun 28, 2007 1:41:29 AM:

      When I received this in an email today from NGLTF the first thing I thought was 'wow, so there goes another civil rights organization as a hack for the Democratic Party.'

      I'm a Democrat (though seriously considering 'Independent'), but I believe a Civil Rights organization should be party neutral otherwise it's not about civil rights it's about getting your party elected.

      And this output from NGLTF just looked like massaging the facts to favor a party over civil rights.

      So a big Red 'X' on NGLTF from me until they get back to Civil Rights and leave party politicking to the group that can't seem to get enough: HRC.

    1. beergoggles on Jun 28, 2007 9:42:31 AM:

      Great post. There is no excuse for lying by omission as the NGLTF has done.

      I look forward to another gay organization putting out a factually correct list or failing that, some blogger doing the same (hint hint).

    1. PBH on Jun 28, 2007 4:42:17 PM:

      Rudy Giuliani or Vampire Ghouliani?

      http://www.prosebeforehos.com/government_employee/06/19/rudy-giuliani-or-vampire/

    1. Andoni on Jun 29, 2007 9:32:50 AM:

      Everyone has an agenda. When blatant inaccuracies occur like this, it is the job of the press to point them out. Thank you, Chris. So, where is the “Consumer’s Report” of politics?

      Actually, one thing people who think an injustice was done should contact members of the NGLT Board to express your disapproval (http://thetaskforce.org/about_us/board_of_directors).

      On a separate issue, I’ve been wondering why Bloomberg doesn’t simply go back to the Democratic Party and run in those primaries? Does he think he cannot win? Or once you leave, you can’t go back? Or does he think he would have more leverage as an Independent?

      Maybe he has one more surprise announcement to make, but is waiting for the right timing. I mean, if he goes back to D, he will automatically be on the ballot in all the primary states. Thoughts?

    1. Andoni on Jun 29, 2007 9:33:04 AM:

      Everyone has an agenda. When blatant inaccuracies occur like this, it is the job of the press to point them out. Thank you, Chris. So, where is the “Consumer’s Report” of politics?

      Actually, one thing people who think an injustice was done should contact members of the NGLT Board to express your disapproval (http://thetaskforce.org/about_us/board_of_directors).

      On a separate issue, I’ve been wondering why Bloomberg doesn’t simply go back to the Democratic Party and run in those primaries? Does he think he cannot win? Or once you leave, you can’t go back? Or does he think he would have more leverage as an Independent?

      Maybe he has one more surprise announcement to make, but is waiting for the right timing. I mean, if he goes back to D, he will automatically be on the ballot in all the primary states. Thoughts?

    1. Kevin on Jun 29, 2007 1:01:07 PM:

      Andoni: If Bloomberg does run, one of the main messages of his campaign will likely be that both parties' activists (aka primary voters) are so out of touch that they alternatively produce idiotically unwinnable Dems and hopelessly right-wing (or incompetent) GOPers. And his challenge will be that he's the Perot of this race, only much richer, with a solid track record, and not insane.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    © Citizen Crain - All Rights Reserved | Design by E.Webscapes Design Studio | Powered by: TypePad